


How to Write a Casefic

by Jolie_Black



Category: Bones (TV), Broadchurch, Dexter (TV), Lucifer (TV), Miss Marple - Agatha Christie, Multi-Fandom, NCIS, Poirot - Agatha Christie, Supernatural, The X-Files
Genre: Case Fic, Crime Fiction, Crime stories, Crime writing, Detective stories, Detectives, Meta, Murder Mystery, Mystery, Other, Writing, Writing Advice, casefic, mystery writing
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2021-02-11
Updated: 2021-02-11
Packaged: 2021-03-17 17:08:08
Rating: General Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 3
Words: 13,056
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/29353965
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/Jolie_Black/pseuds/Jolie_Black
Summary: A multi-fandom meta on how to write casefic. Dos, don'ts, and rules of thumb.
Comments: 10
Kudos: 18





	1. Chapter 1 – The Planning Stage

**Author's Note:**

> I originally wrote this meta as a guide to writing casefic for the BBC "Sherlock" fandom specifically. If you're in the BBC "Sherlock" fandom, too, I highly recommend that you read the "Sherlock"-specific version [here](https://archiveofourown.org/works/8042029/chapters/18418816) because it's got lot of fandom-specific advice and a whole bunch of examples/recs. But I've since been told by a couple of readers from other fandoms that they'd love a meta like this, too, so I decided to rework the original version into this multi-fandom (or rather, fandom-neutral) edition. I hope you'll find it useful!

**Introduction**

Compared to the popularity of the crime genre in general, casefic - as in, stories that focus on one or more investigators solving a crime, or case - is a surprisingly small genre in fanfiction. Out of over 7 million fanworks posted on AO3 by February 2021, only about 35,000 were tagged "casefic" or "case fic". As you can see, the genre is so small that the powers that be on AO3 still haven't even bothered to give us one consistent genre tag.

I find this lack of popularity surprising. Clever deductions, jaw-dropping plot twists, cracking good action, and the satisfaction of a puzzle solved and a bad guy brought to justice - could you resist? But still, both as readers and as writers, a lot of us crime fans still give casefic a wide berth. There may be many reasons for that - but just in case one of them is that most authors simply don't dare write it, let me try to provide some encouragement.

Crime fiction is as diverse as fiction in general. There is no place on earth and no era in the history of mankind that you can't find crime fiction about. There are historical crime stories, there is classic detective fiction that was contemporary at the time of writing but has since acquired a lot of patina (think Arthur Conan Doyle, Agatha Christie, G. K. Chesterton, Raymond Chandler etc.), and there are present day crime stories. There are even crime stories from outer space, or set in entirely fictional universes.

There are all kinds of investigators in crime fiction, too – police officers and other law enforcement officials, private investigators, investigative journalists, ambitious amateurs and even totally accidental detectives, with all levels of skills and particular abilities and strengths (and flaws), who operate within all kinds of legal and social framework.

Crime stories are told in books, movies, TV shows and in the form of radio plays and podcasts.

I admit that coming up with rules and guidelines that apply equally to all of these subgenres seems very ambitious. But while there's certainly not one single fail-proof recipe how to pull off the casefic of the century in _any_ fandom, there _are_ certain techniques and patterns that tend to work well irrespectively of the who, when and where of your particular canon material. The point of this meta is to describe and explore those.

There are six absolute dos and don'ts in casefic. Six standing orders, six golden rules, six laws set in stone. (Or five, if your casefic is a one-shot.) Observing them or not will make or break your story. You'll find them in Chapter 3. Chapters 1 and 2 lead up to them, containing additional advice and suggestions that you're totally free to take or leave, depending on whether they apply to your story or not.

Some of this advice is rather basic, and it's addressed mostly to people who don't yet have a ton of experience writing casefic. So I apologise in advance if you feel that I'm occasionally stating the obvious. But I'll also include a few cherries on top - some extra stunts that will make your story truly stand out, and will really put your readers on the edges of their seats and make them gasp at your brilliance. Those I'll refer to as "masterclass level". To the true connoisseurs among you, of course even those won't be news. But in that case, you're probably wasting your time reading this anyway!

** Chapter 1: The Planning Stage **

**1\. Casefic is hard work**

OK, ugly truths first. Casefic is hard work. As I said, crime books and shows are vastly popular, but the effort that goes into creating them is underrated. People usually treat them as light entertainment, which may be justified from the reader's/audience's point of view. But that doesn't mean it's a picnic to write.

Casefic is not for impatient writers. A lot of brainwork goes into constructing, researching and then actually writing a plausible, logical case. Always. There's no such thing as an off-the-cuff, conceive-write-and-post in one night casefic, unless it's extremely short. Writing casefic is incredibly rewarding in many other ways, but the one thing it really doesn't provide is instant gratification.

So before you embark on a casefic, make sure you're ready to put that much effort into a single story. I'll be honest with you: If writing fanfic is, for you, all about getting the mental images out on paper/screen in one go and then moving on without ever looking back, casefic is probably not your genre.

**2\. Inspiration is everywhere**

The next things you'll need to think about are questions that you can only answer yourself.

What's the story you want to tell? What sort of crime happens? In what place, and in what environment? What era within the timeframe of the books/show/movie are we in? Which canon characters will appear? Which additional original characters will you have to make up? How does the crime get solved? What are the major clues? And what is the story's impact on the main characters?

It's your story and your ideas, no tutorial can come up with the answers for you. All I can offer are some general guidelines on where to find inspiration.

**a) Crimes**

If you haven't got a specific idea of your own yet, work off the canon of your books/show/movie. Maybe there are "unwritten" or "unfilmed" cases mentioned in there that you could bring to life and expand on. If you're into historical fiction or classic detective stories (Agatha Christie and the like), read up on past true crimes on websites like [History by the Yard](http://www.historybytheyard.co.uk/stories_from_the_yard.htm). It doesn't always have to be Jack the Ripper – there are a lot of interesting, less high-profile historic cases out there, both solved and unsolved, that could be just what you're looking for.

If your fandom has a contemporary setting, scan the news (or listen to true crime podcasts) for any real crimes that could serve as inspiration. Many police departments of large cities have websites chronicling their work, too. These are also a great source for general information on police organisation and procedure.

Or do it the other way round – first pick the location, the environment, the setting that you want your story to play out in; then think about what sort of crime could happen there. Haven't you ever walked or travelled past a place that looked like a fantastic backdrop to put a dead body in?

Speaking of dead bodies - murder sells, of course, but fanfic is free, so depending on the typical violence level of your canon material, you're not necessarily obliged to kill anyone off. All sorts of crimes can feature in a casefic, although the stakes will of course be higher the more serious the crime is. Particularly bizarre crimes, exotic locations, and high levels of gore can help you to get attention, but especially in the latter case, don't overdo it. It's fine if your killer has a penchant for dismembering their victims and distributing the body parts all over London's most famous tourist sights, but there needs to be a good reason why they do it, and you need to address it eventually. You're still writing a casefic, not a script for a splatter movie.

Some cracking good mysteries even turn out not to be a crime at all. In that case, however, there is always a certain danger that the true solution - accident, suicide, or a scam set up by the supposed victim themselves - may read like a bit of an anti-climax. So if you go for this option, make sure that the solution itself, or the story in general, has enough other redeeming features to help balance your readers' potential disappointment.

Whatever your crime and your mystery is – an engaging casefic makes the outcome of the story matter to the investigators. A clever plot with brilliant deductions, interesting locations, exciting gunfights/chases and engaging OCs is well and good, but if you really want to touch your readers' hearts, don't let your investigators solve it as a nine-to-five job that they do as a matter of course and then head back home and forget all about it.

You and your readers wouldn't love your favourite books/show/movie if you didn't love the protagonists, and both the best canon cases and the best casefics are always those that teach us something new about them – that reveal some intriguing piece of backstory, or that show us some hitherto hidden human quality, and that make the characters grow and learn and appreciate things about themselves and each other that they weren't aware of before. I would go so far as to say that _all_ the really brilliant casefics that I've read to date have had such an aspect to them. It's something your readers will love you for.

There are various ways how to make your particular case matter more than most to your detectives:

You can place your investigators under a special moral obligation to solve your case, for example if

  * they are friends, or used to be friends, with the victim, or with someone close to the victim; or
  * the victim came to them for advice or help before the actual crime happened, but was dismissed as hysterical, fake, or otherwise unworthy of their attention; or maybe the victim tried but never managed to reach/contact them; or
  * the victim represents a cause or a conviction or a lifestyle that the detectives approve of, believe in and hold dear, and that they want to see defended and avenged; or
  * the perpetrator is an old enemy and the detectives still have a score to settle with them.



You're of course free to combine several of these aspects. You can also play on your detectives' instincts of pride and/or revenge to spur them on more than usual,

  * by making the crime a personal provocation that the perpetrator uses to taunt them with, for example because they think themselves cleverer or untouchable; or
  * by making the perpetrator (physically and/or emotionally) hurt the detectives or someone close to them in the course of the investigation.



Or the crime could be so horrendous and the threat to Queen and Country so great and the possible consequences so harrowing that _only_ your heroes can save the day. This option can tend to get a little cheesy if you overdo it, though, so handle with care. There can only be so many people every day who try and blow up the Houses of Parliament.

**b) Environments**

What sort of environment will your story play out in? Is it set in a world of dark alleys, backrooms of dingy pubs, gang warfare, drug deals and all other sorts of shady underworld business? Or is it set in idyllic middle-class suburbia where everything looks perfect on the surface although there's deep trouble brewing underneath? Or is it set in high-flying elite circles, among business tycoons, politicians, celebrities or royalty? Or will it move back and forth between these worlds, intriguing your readers by the contrast?

You've all heard the advice to "write what you know about". That _is_ sound advice. Authenticity is, by definition, hard to fake. But it's not impossible to fake. So I'd absolutely want to add, "or write what you can plausibly _pretend_ to your readers to know about". Because you don't need to be an absolute expert in the environment your story is set in, as long as you can acquire enough theoretical expertise to appear as one. It's amazing how far Wikipedia will get you on any random subject. So it definitely is possible to compensate a lack of true first-hand experience with proper research. If you're writing historical casefic, or sci-fi casefic, you'll have to rely on make-believe anyway.

And by the way - if you _have_ real first-hand expertise, don't overdo it either. I know it's tempting to show people how, for example, medicine or criminal law or forensic science or computer technology really work, because they're so often misrepresented in crime fiction. By all means present those aspects in your story as realistically and as accurately as possible. But remember at all times that your chosen environment is only your canvas, and the story is your painting, not the other way round. Take care to stick with storytelling, and don't make your casefic into an operating manual or a textbook instead. For example, don't use too much unexplained geek speak (acronyms, complicated medical terms, obscure technical terms etc.), certainly not more than you'd find in your canon itself. It will confuse rather than impress your readers.

If a specific piece of information is important for your story, but it is specialist rather than general knowledge, let the characters themselves introduce and explain it, rather than stepping out of the story and explaining it in a footnote (or worse, not at all). Let the medical examiner/pathologist expound medical phenomena. Legal questions can be raised and answered by police officers, prosecutors and defence lawyers. Most crime series/shows have a cast of consultants like that – don't hesitate to make use of them.

If you're unsure whether you've left the realm of storytelling and veered into textbook territory, have your story (or at least the relevant passages) test-read by a friend who doesn't possess your own level of expertise, and listen to their opinion.

**c) Locations**

The locations your story is set in will of course depend greatly on the environment you've chosen.

But no matter what city/country/world/galaxy and what era your story is set in - you already have a great variety of canon locations at your disposal before you even have to start thinking about making up new ones. Don't worry that setting scenes in one of those canon locations could be considered unoriginal. Your readers won't mind it in the least. On the contrary, they will immediately feel at home, without the need of much description and scene setting. The appeal of the familiar will work in your favour there. Many crime series/shows lean heavily on these highly recognisable (and sometimes downright iconic) standard canon locations. They're often used as shorthand to set a scene or set the mood. You're totally allowed to do that, too.

But you probably won't manage to make do only with canonical locations. So unless you happen to live in the place you're writing about, or have been there in the past and remember it extremely well, this is another point where research comes in. Google Earth, Google Streetview, OpenStreetmap and any other such tools are your best friends at this point. Especially if you're outside the country your story is set in, they're also great for getting a good general impression of what houses, streets, villages and cities look like there. If your research doesn't render the exact location you're looking for, it's fine to be vague. In fact, unless you've chosen a well-known landmark that people will expect to be depicted accurately in every detail, it'll give you more freedom if you only loosely base your fictional location on a real one.

If your story is set in a fictional world or in historical surroundings, study the canon material very closely to get it right. In the case of historical fiction, maybe read up a bit on that era in general.

**d) Original characters**

Unless you're planning to let one canon character kill another canon character off, which limits your possibilities rather dramatically, you probably won't manage without at least one original character (OC). Here, too, inspiration is everywhere.

I find it perfectly legitimate to base OCs on real persons I've met. It's not good manners, of course, to exactly reproduce a real person in fiction unless you have their express permission to do so, particularly if your portrayal of them is less than flattering. But why not adapt certain physical characteristics or personality traits?

Or – my personal favourite variant - bring in a secondary or even a tertiary (mentioned but never seen) character from the series/show itself. Give them a backstory and a personality, and in the case of the tertiary characters, a name or a face to start with. Your canon probably already has a full cast of these recurring "extras" that have a certain narrative function but not much of a personality yet. Maybe one of them is your ideal victim. Or turns out to have a really dark side. I guarantee you that your readers will be tickled pink to finally get to know that grumpy receptionist™/nosy landlady™/annoying colleague™ better. The appeal of the familiar will work in your favour here, too.

To conclude this section, a word on villains in particular - or on antagonists, rather, since not every person who comes into conflict with the protagonists of a crime story needs to be inherently evil.

A general and useful rule for writing crime fiction is that the antagonist should not overshadow the protagonist, but they still need to be a worthy opponent. You don't want your readers to be so impressed/in love with your antagonist that they end up emotionally changing sides. But there's also no thrill in a genius detective taking down a blundering idiot. If your fandom features a detective who is blessed with and famous for their unusual mental capacities (think "supersleuths" like Sherlock Holmes or Hercule Poirot), it's of course difficult to come up with a believable antagonist who is anywhere near the same level of intelligence. But antagonists in crime stories can still be "worthy" - meaning sufficiently dangerous - in other ways. Sheer physical superiority can serve the purpose, if there are physical confrontations in your story. It could also be their utter unpredictability that gives them an advantage. It could be their ruthlessness and total lack of any scruples or moral inhibitions. It could be their fanatical belief that they're in the right (think terrorists, religious fanatics or vigilantes). Or it could be a secret hold that they have over one of your heroes.

Readers tend to find three-dimensional villains - complex, conflicted characters that they may even sympathise with, to a point - more interesting than your average thug who's just evil and that's it. But it's not a must. How detailed a picture you paint of your villain depends on the length of your story and on what else you want to focus on. If your casefic already has other special features, such as - for example - an original and well-drawn OC in a different role (as victim/witness/client/POV character), or a beautiful, emotional bromance or romance subplot for the investigators, don't beat yourself up if you've no time and space to waste on making up the most original villain ever imagined, too.

The one type of antagonist that I'd avoid is the certified madman. Of course, criminals very often _have_ mental health issues. Psychopaths exist. But crimes are usually more interesting if they have an at least rudimentary rational motive. So even if your antagonist is mentally deranged in some way or another, your story will be more interesting if they commit their crimes for a better reason than "they just like to see people die/suffer" or "a voice in their head told them to kill". They can act without any moral scruples, but they shouldn't dispense with logic. There should be an understandable reason, at least within their own twisted world view, why exactly they committed this particular crime against this particular person. Random violence against random victims is not only horrible but also actually boring. Because it poses no intellectual challenge to either the detectives or the readers, and that's what casefic is all about.

**3\. Who's telling the story?**

When you've decided on a plot, an environment, your main locations and the major characters involved, you need to decide which character actually tells the story. Quite apart from the question whose voice you trust yourself to imitate best, choosing the point of view (POV) carefully is also incredibly important for how the case plays out, which revelation comes when, and who knows what at what point. As a first step, get aware of how POV works in your source material. If you're working off a book or book series, check whose POV the canon material is in, and then decide whether the same will work for you, or whether your story will work better (and maybe be more fun) if you adopt a different POV than usual. If you're working off a film or TV show, it's a bit trickier. Movies and TV episodes are not usually in a specific POV. So unless you write in script/screenplay format, and unless you opt for the (always less interesting) omniscient author's POV, there will need to be a narrative shift into a specific POV.

The conventional POV in crime fiction is, of course, that of the (main) investigator. And if your main investigator is a thoroughly human person with no particularly amazing intellect, that's usually just fine. If your detective is one of the above-mentioned "supersleuths" with superhuman mental capacities, however, writing casefic from their POV becomes difficult. Their acuity and cleverness puts them several steps ahead of everyone else. So if you let your readers share their every thought right away, that pretty much ruins the mystery. Then again, if you let them share only a fragment of their thought processes and keep the rest secret to preserve the mystery, you're breaking one of the six golden rules of writing good casefic - the rule that says that whatever you do, you can't lie to your readers (more about this in Chapter 3).

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the godfather of detective fiction, knew how to resolve that dilemma. There's a reason why he told the Sherlock Holmes stories from the POV of an admiring Everyman by the name of Doctor Watson, rather than - with a very few exceptions - through the eyes of the Great Detective himself. The same still holds true more than a hundred years later. Doctor Watson – or whatever name the archetypical detective's sidekick/assistant/best mate goes by in your own fandom - is and remains your ideal POV character when writing supersleuth casefic. The assistant or best mate will be close enough to the action to see and hear everything important, and close enough to the supersleuth to be allowed to share their theories (and, if applicable, worries and frustrations and fears) as the case progresses. And yet - as a rule – the assistant or best mate is never in possession of all the facts (or at least of their proper interpretation) until the denouement at the end. So in supersleuth fandoms, telling the story through the eyes of a Doctor Watson gives your readers a fair chance to keep up with developments, while still allowing you to preserve the mystery as long as you need.

You're not obliged to take the main investigator's or their assistant's POV, however. There are many excellent casefics that are told through the eyes of a third person that gets caught up in the events - as friends, as victims (of a non-lethal crime, obviously), as clients, as witnesses.

Of this, there are two variants: One option is to pick a secondary canon character as your POV character. The other option is to create an OC as your POV character. In fact, many readers really enjoy the so-called outsider perspective. Especially if your canonical protagonists are a bit larger-than-life, it can add wonderful humour and even unexpected depth to a story to look at them through the eyes of someone outside their usual orbit who doesn't already know them and their particular quirks well.

This third party perspective - both variants, secondary canon characters and OCs - has its limits though. Unless you literally make your POV character move in with the investigators, there's no way the POV character will see and hear and know everything that's going on. So unless you want to resort to slightly clumsy techniques such as, for example, making your POV character accidentally overhear a conversation between the investigators in which they expound their theories, you'll need to keep very good track of what the POV character can plausibly know and what they can't know at any given point in the story. For example, unless the POV character is involved in the investigation in an official capacity, or unless the crime happened in their own home, they're not likely to be allowed onto the crime scene or into the investigators' meetings and briefings.

You're not even limited to a single POV. It's a common technique in crime fiction to tell the first chapter/scene (usually by way of a prologue) from the POV of a secondary character (often either the victim or the perpetrator of the crime), and then switch to the investigator's POV for the main story. That's perfectly permissible. In crime stories featuring a duo of lead investigators, you'll often canonically have alternating POVs. Feel free to do that in your story, too. If you think switching POVs _is_ the best way to tell your story, however, make sure there's a clearly recognisable pattern to it (like alternating between Investigator A and Investigator B in every chapter/scene). See to it that they get roughly the same POV „time", too – it would be rather clumsy to narrate eight chapters from the POV of Investigator A but only two from the POV of Investigator B. Don't under any circumstances - and this is basic writing advice that applies to any genre – switch POVs randomly, just because it seems more convenient to suddenly be in someone else's head.

So - got your crime, locations, characters and POV? Then you're all set. Now write! :)


	2. Chapter 2 - The Writing Stage

**Chapter 2: The Writing Stage**

**1\. Getting started**

Writing the scenes/chapters of your story in chronological order makes the most sense, but isn't always easiest. That empty page staring back at you while you're trying to come up with a good opening line can be paralysing at times.

I tend to start with the scenes of the story that I like best and that I'm picturing most vividly in my head - in short, the scenes for the sake of which I'm writing the story at all. Then I fill the gaps. If you're willing to go back over your entire story again and again to ensure the proper sequence of events and check for continuity errors, that's perfectly permissible.

The only strict rule I have is to always write the denouement/resolution last of all. I take lots of notes of what needs to be covered in it while I write everything else, but I've found that it saves a lot of retroactive editing if I leave the actual writing of the solution till last.

But back to the start of your story, no matter at what point in time you actually write it. Most tutorials on "How to write crime fiction" will insist that the story needs to start with a BANG. A first sentence "like a shotgun blast in the middle of the night", and a dead body on the very first page, as [this - otherwise quite useful - meta on writing original crime fiction](http://www.thecreativepenn.com/2014/01/17/writing-crime/) demands. In fanfic, I'd say that's fine but certainly not required. You can just as well start your casefic in the way that cases usually start in your canon – with police officers getting called to a crime scene, or with a client bringing a case to the private investigator, or whatever else is the norm in your universe. Again, as so often in fanfic, the appeal of the familiar will keep your readers reading even if they're not at maximum stress levels from the first paragraph onwards.

However, do try and get your readers hooked by the end of the first scene/chapter. Especially if you post in instalments rather than the whole story in one go, people will be unlikely to read on or subscribe and come back if, by the end of the first scene/chapter, there's no indication that the case you promised them is going to start any time soon. And even if your story requires the crime to happen (or come to your heroes' attention) only much later on in the story, make sure you've given your readers something else to pique their interest, some mystery, some unanswered question, something that needs following up, by the end of the first scene/chapter.

**2\. Narrative structure**

Some writers find it helpful to make their stories follow a certain structure - three acts, or five acts, like a classical drama. Others prefer to just start writing and see where they end up. Up to you. Casefic tends to be most satisfying when you set your story within the concise boundaries of the unity of time, place and events - which the literary-minded of you may know as the ["Classical Unities" or "Aristotelian Unities"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_unities). Many crime stories follow this pattern, taking course over a single day or a couple of days at most, in a limited number of locations, and never deviating from the focus on the actual case. In one-shots, this will happen almost automatically. But it works well in longish chaptered stories, too.

Of course your story can also be of epic scope, covering weeks or even months, moving from your investigators' usual haunts to the ends of the earth and back again if the plot requires it. Do make sure though that in that case, both your motivation and your stamina will last long enough to see it through. Like the route to the summit of Mount Everest is littered with frozen corpses, every fanfic archive I know is littered with abandoned WIPs (works in progress) that were so vast in scope and so complex in plot that they ended up defeating their own authors. At least if you're new to casefic, it's probably wiser to start with something smaller.

Likewise, time gaps (that require chapter headings like "Three Months Later") aren't an absolute no-no, but they're awkward and should really be restricted to prologues and epilogues. It's difficult to maintain the dramatic tension if your protagonists take a break investigating and only pick up the case again a lot later. The more your detectives are affected by the crime and the more it matters to them to clear it up, the less likely it is that they'll give it a rest for a while.

The only elements that you really do need to include in any casefic are, obviously, the crime, the process of its solution, and the solution itself. In that order, please.

It's easiest to tell the story in straightforward chronological order. Switching back and forth between the present and flashbacks to past events is masterclass level and only works if the pattern is clearly recognisable to the reader, such as when you add on a frame narrative at the beginning and at the end, like bookends.

Never leave your readers in any doubt about what moment in the timeline they're in. Avoid time jumps in particular – don't relate events in a different order than they really happened in, at least not without making it crystal clear that that's what you're doing. Otherwise you come close to messing with your readers, and thus to violating one of the six golden rules of good casefic. Non-linear narrative can be very impressive when done skillfully in other genres, but if you try it in casefic, your story will very likely suffer rather than improve. Unreliable narrators and casefic don't belong together for the same reason.

**3\. Deductions**

There are detective stories who do without these, of course. Many modern police procedurals especially rely on forensic analysis, surveillance, undercover ops and IT wizardry to solve their mysteries, rather than on a supersleuth with a magnifying glass picking out tiny clues and coming to mindboggling conclusions that nobody else could have drawn. Other crime stories again are heavy on psychological stuff like interrogation techniques and mindgames, rather than strictly logical reasoning.

But most classic detective stories aren't complete without at least one stunning, snappy deduction – an investigator's sudden brainwave that sheds light on the mystery, based on their acute powers of observation. These deductions are hard to write, but they're always worth it. If they're part of your chosen canon, then your readers will absolutely love you if you manage to pull off one of those in your own story, too.

A deduction, in crime fiction, means that you perceive a fact and then reason backwards to its cause, using your background knowledge to form that link. So if you ever notice that some things have a specific smell or taste or sound, or leave certain specific traces, take a note of those. Or work backwards – what could _you_ deduce from certain circumstances? Which of _your_ usual activities leave what traces? Whatever field you have specialist knowledge in (through your job, or through a hobby – everyone of us has something they know better than most others!), feel free to turn it into a deduction. Just keep your eyes and ears open. Sometimes these things will occur to you suddenly and out of context, and you'll only manage to fit them into a story much later.

**4\. Creating suspense**

One reason why good crime stories make for such a satisfying read is the intellectual challenge of the puzzle, but the other half of the fascination is the thrill that comes with dealing with a dangerous opponent. It's of course up to you what amount of thrill and suspense you want in your story, or whether you prefer to focus just on the intellectual game instead. But I personally find that the best casefics have a good measure of both.

There are lots of ways how to create suspense, or ratchet up existing suspense levels.

**a) Danger**

The simplest (but still the most efficient) method is actual physical danger. There are many forms this can take. For example, you can

  * make the perpetrator commit/threaten to commit another crime, or an even worse one; or
  * make the perpetrator try and escape detection by trying to kill, kidnap or otherwise silence an unwanted witness; or
  * make the perpetrator try and escape detection by trying to kill, kidnap or otherwise silence the investigators; or
  * make the perpetrator try and coerce the investigators into abandoning the investigation by hurting/threatening to hurt someone they care about.



These scenarios all make for great thrills and will provide excellent opportunities for some cracking good action – (gun)fights, chases, rescues - and maybe even for some lovely H/C afterwards.

But whatever danger it is your heroes are facing, don't overdo this. No matter whether your story is short or long,

  * increase the dose gradually,
  * save the highest danger level for the climax of your story,
  * and don't use the same scenario more than once within the same story.



Depending on the length and complexity of your story, you can certainly have several separate dangerous situations over the course of it. But make sure the danger level rises continuously, i. e. make each of your dangerous moments more dangerous than the one before, not the other way round. Also, alternate dangerous moments with moments of quiet and (relative) safety. Danger is only narratively effective if it's perceived by the characters (and hence by the readers) as something that's shockingly out of the ordinary. So don't try and keep up the same danger level continuously over the course of several chapters/scenes, or even over the entire story. If there's never any relief, your readers will get used to even very high stress levels and eventually become immune to them, which will ruin the effect you're going for. So to maintain the narrative effect of your several separate danger doses, take care to let the characters wind down in between. Comic relief and banter are excellent for that purpose. Or if comedy doesn't fit the mood, try some quiet romance/bromance/domestic bliss and/or a bit of H/C.

Rule of thumb: Don't make a main character nearly die more than once in the same story. Also don't make more than one main character nearly die in the same story. Or else your readers will soon recognise the pattern and just start yawning.

**b) Constraints**

Other ways to increase suspense, without necessarily exposing anyone to physical danger, include placing constraints on your investigators that make it more difficult for them to solve the case and/or prevent further crimes.

**i) Constraints of Time**

You can use time constraints. Very simple: Put your detectives on a ticking clock. Make the perpetrator threaten to do something really nasty at a certain point in time unless they're stopped ("Catch me within 12 hours, or BOOM."). Or, if your investigator is not part of the official police, how about the official police are on their way to arrest the wrong person, and your hero must have found the proof of the person's innocence or identified the true perpetrator by the time the cops get there? Or, the suspect is about to leave the country and the investigators must solve the case and get a warrant in time to stop them? Or, the private detective engages in a bit of burglary and must find the incriminating documents before the suspect returns to his house/office and has them arrested for breaking and entering?

**ii) Constraints of Place**

You can also use constraints of place. Geographical isolation is a narrative device that has been used in the crime genre since time immemorial, and it's extremely effective. Feel free to put your investigators alone on an island, or have them snowed in in an isolated place, or make them get lost in the wilds. Scenarios like these create suspense by limiting resources and means of communication even before there's actual danger. Then add danger on top, and you have an excellent recipe for getting your readers onto the edges of their seats. Make your investigators lose their phone signal and then encounter the bad guy with no way of calling for backup. Or hurt your investigators somewhere where there's no first aid kit or ambulance service within reach. Your readers will scream with delight. The only disadvantage is that you'll often have to move outside your investigators' usual haunts for scenarios like these, which means more explanation, and more research.

**iii) Constraints of Means**

Depending on which tools your investigators usually use to solve their cases, removing them can also be a simple but effective way of increasing the odds they're up against.

Do they usually carry a gun or other weapon? Try finding a reason why they don't have it on them in a particular critical situation.

Do they rely heavily on their mobile phones, radios or other means of communication with each other or with their headquarters? Try creating technical difficulties that make those stop working.

Are they usually invested with a specific authority or powers that help them in their investigation (such as the legal right to arrest a suspect, search a house, interrogate witnesses etc.)? Find a reason to strip them of those powers for the time being, for example because they're off duty, because they (allegedly or really) misbehaved and got suspended, or because the higher-ups block the investigation for political reasons or as a result of corruption.

Do they usually work as part of a team and rely heavily on others' specific skills (such as superior intellect, physical strength, specialist knowledge, or charm)? Come up with an excuse why they're on their own this time.

**c) Removing certainties**

An even more sophisticated way of creating or increasing suspense is to remove a reassuring certainty. (This could actually be classed as a particularly refined version of the Constraints of Means discussed above under b) iii) – the psychological version of it, if you like.) Aside from technical equipment and rules and regulations that give them certain powers, your heroes will very likely also have a psychological/emotional framework to their crime solving routine that they tend to rely on as a matter of course. Remove one (or several) of those and see how that changes the atmosphere.

Examples:

    * Does your canon material feature a boss/superior who usually trusts and supports the investigators, even when they use unconventional methods or take unusual risks? Then what if that superior is suddenly incapacitated, out of reach, replaced or otherwise not available when they get into trouble, so nobody's got their backs this time? If your hero is a private investigator, they will often have friends (or at least useful contacts) among the official police who may supply them with information or maybe even bend police rules to help them out. But what if it's not the usual friendly police officer in charge this time, but someone else who dislikes the private investigator and isn't willing to cooperate with them? Or the friendly police officer gets overruled by his superiors? Or the PI and the friendly police officer find themselves on opposing sides for once?
    * Most investigators in crime fiction – be they official or private – have headquarters that serve as a safe refuge where they can recoup, store evidence and conduct meetings and interviews. But what if this place comes under enemy surveillance or even under attack one day, and our heroes are no longer safe there?
    * Are your investigators usually seen as good guys by everyone, and nobody doubts their honest intentions? So what if one of them suddenly comes under suspicion themselves? If you've got a team of investigators, what will it do to their relationship with _each other_? There is nothing more unsettling to the human psyche than to suddenly question whether you can still trust someone you've always trusted before. Make use of that



**d) Cliffhangers**

A technically simple but very effective way of keeping up the suspense is a cliffhanger - as in, cutting off your scene/chapter just when your readers are dying to know what comes next.

They're easy to do in chaptered stories, and they hardly ever fail to impress. At masterclass level, you can even work them into a one-shot, usually by way of a POV switch at just the right (i. e. wrong) moment.

Write your scene so it deliberately moves towards the cliffhanger; don't try and work them afterwards into an already existing scene, or they'll break the flow. Don't ruin a great action sequence by snipping it in half in the editing process; if it was never intended to be interrupted by a scene/chapter break, then do your cliffhanging at some other place in the story.

There's not much else to say about them. They work. Use them shamelessly.

**5\. Ending the story**

Traditionally, a detective story ends with a denouement in which the main investigator reveals the solution to the mystery, and with a showdown in which the good guys confront the guilty party, and the guilty party gets their just deserts in some way or another (commonly by getting arrested, getting killed, or killing themselves). This is essential to a casefic, too. The readers need their questions answered, and there have to be consequences for the characters involved. You can't cheat them out of either.

As G. K. Chesterton, another of the godfathers of classic detective fiction, put it in his ["How to Write a Detective Story"](http://www.chesterton.org/how-to-write-detective/%0A) essay: "The point of the story is light, not darkness." The crime itself is the starting point that upsets the natural and just order of things. Restoring that order is what the rest of the story is all about, and what your readers will want to see. So the denouement is what you're writing towards, the core and centrepiece of your story. Make sure it lives up to that, even if you've already spent a long time on the story and are itching to get it finished.

Depending on the length of your story, it's often a good idea to space out your revelations a bit. In a short story, especially in a one-shot, it's usually fine to just let the investigators accumulate clues and pieces of information, and then present the correct interpretation of them at the end, all in one go. In a longer story, however, it's often more satisfying for the readers if you give them a few pieces of the solution along the way, a few fragments that they can use to build their own theories on. Let the solution take shape gradually, rather than keeping them completely in the dark until the very end.

This latter technique will also enable you to have some nice surprises throughout the story, some unexpected twists, some jawdrop moments - and it's those that will make your readers keep turning pages. At masterclass level, you might even manage to pull off a _double_ twist: Make all your clues point in one direction, so by the time your readers arrive at the denouement, they think they have the solution – and then stun them with the revelation what the solution _really_ is.

But of course, no matter how much or how little you reveal before the end, always save the full picture until last.

This full picture should include not only the identity of the perpetrator (and, if it was ever in question, that of the victim), but also all the pertinent details of the deed. You've all heard of the unholy trinity of Motive, Means and Opportunity – three boxes that criminal investigators try and tick to establish a case against a possible perpetrator. All three will need to be present in your crime, too. They will often be important clues as to the identity of the perpetrator and as to the driving forces behind the crime. So unless you haven't already, make sure you expound all of these in your denouement, too – the motive to commit the crime (for example, financial gain, revenge, silencing a witness), the exact means to commit the crime (including tools/weapons and physical capabilities), and the opportunity to commit the crime (including being present at the crime scene at the time of the offence, or at least having no alibi). The more mysterious and inexplicable one or all of these three factors were in your story, the more important it is to give definite answers now at the latest. For example, don't disappoint your readers by constructing a brilliant locked room mystery and then never telling them how exactly the perpetrator managed to supposedly disappear into thin air. Or, don't disappoint your readers by puzzling the medical examiner with a completely unclear cause of death and then never revealing what kind of poison/drug it was that stopped the victim's heart. Good crime stories are not just a "Whodunnit" but also a "Howdunnit" and Whydunnit".

Whether you combine the denouement and the showdown into one scene or have two separate scenes for them depends of course on the specifics of your story. If your plot is complex, the denouement will probably require a lot of talking (often with a good amount of monologue from the main investigator), while showdowns usually require action, so in a long and complicated mystery that takes some time to explain, it's usually best to keep the two separate, or make one evolve into the other. It can be kind of distracting if you try and make your investigators have a deep and meaningful conversation about how exactly the mystery unravelled while dodging bullets from the fleeing perpetrator. You're also free to choose in what order the denouement and the showdown follow each other. Both variants are fine – you can reveal the villain's identity first, then catch them and then explain all the details about the When, Where, How and Why after the showdown. Or you can let the When, Where, How and Why unfold first, then reveal the perpetrator's identity as the crowning glory of the denouement, and then have your dramatic showdown that ends in their death or capture. This latter variant is usually the best way to go if your villain is present at the denouement in a different capacity and only gets "unmasked" during the process.

Whatever your denouement and your showdown look like, finish the story soon afterwards. You may still - justly - feel the need to wrap up a few loose ends or subplots that aren't part of the actual solution to the mystery. Or if the story ends on a particularly sad and tragic note, you may feel the need to lighten the mood with a bit of comic relief, to reassure your readers that your heroes will eventually be fine again. But don't make the story drag on and on.

Rule of thumb: Allow yourself one more chapter/scene after the denouement/showdown (and possibly an additional short epilogue), but no more.

Try and tie up all the loose ends. Always tie up the _major_ loose ends. You owe your readers the answers to all the questions you've made them ask. Don't leave them hanging in the air. If, for example, you've included big red herrings, such as an innocent character behaving suspiciously for a reason that turns out to have nothing to do with the crime at all, explain the true reason. Or if you've created an engaging OC that you want your readers to care about and sympathise with, give us a hint how they'll move on from the case, and what will become of them. If your case has deeply affected the investigators emotionally, give them some closure (or at least a promise of closure). With minor loose ends or mini-subplots, a single explanatory line will often do, but it will be sorely missed if it isn't there.


	3. Chapter 3 - Six Golden Rules

**Chapter 3: Six Golden Rules**

**Rule No. 1: Make sense. **

Because you must. In casefic, both the solution and the process of arriving at the solution must strictly follow the rules of logic. You can make your plot twist and turn until your readers are dizzy with the shocks and surprises, but they trust _you_ to keep the boat on an even keel. So make absolutely sure your own charts are in good order to start with.

Check your story, over and over again, for any logical flaws and continuity errors. Never lose sight of who is doing what, when, where and most importantly _why._ Remember Motive, Means and Opportunity – have a completely clear idea of all three of those before you even write down the first word of the story. Work with a detailed timeline to keep track of the sequence of events. If your puzzle depends on the specific layout of a location, draw a plan to make sure you stay consistent. Always be aware of all your characters' reasons and motivations for doing what they do, at any time.

If you realise that something's happening but you can't really say how it came about, or if something needs to happen but you don't know how to get there, you're dealing with a plot hole. And plot holes want to be fixed. If you really get stuck, go back and redraft/rewrite as much of the story as necessary. Maybe let the matter rest for a couple of days, don't try and force it. Some more good advice on how to overcome writer's block can by found in [this very helpful meta by JBaillier](http://archiveofourown.org/works/7155284).

But as long as you feel your story is deficient in the department of logic, _do_ something. Just ignoring a plot hole or a logical flaw never helps. Trust me, they never just go away on their own.

And don't take the easy way out! However handy it may appear, you should never resolve your mystery through accident or coincidence. Of course accidents and coincidences can feature in the story. Our lives are made up of them, after all. Single clues can fall into the investigators' laps; but the solution as such can't. They have to work it out themselves, not receive it as a gift. Because that's what heroes do.

Likewise, _unless_ supernatural phenomena are an established and accepted part of your canon material, never fall back on supernatural explanations. _Supposedly_ supernatural phenomena can of course be part of your mystery. It's a great crime story tradition to scare your readers with a seemingly supernatural threat and then let your investigator discover a reassuringly rational explanation. But in a canon universe that is grounded in the laws of nature as we know them, the supernatural can never be part of your _solution_. And to solve your case, dubious techniques like psychic "deducing", relying on intuition, hypnosis, contacting spirits etc. are completely out of the question, too, unless your canon states otherwise.

**Rule No. 2: Do your research! **

Seriously. The most creative and original casefic will impress nobody if it's based on facts, scenarios, premises or mechanisms that are – at least within your canon universe - provably non-existent or wrong. Unless you've established honestly that you're writing a modern AU, Miss Marple really can't pull out a mobile phone and do a quick search on the internet about that mysterious new neighbour of hers.

I said above that you don't need to be an expert in your chosen environment as long as you can successfully pretend to be. But that doesn't excuse you from checking your facts as thoroughly as you possibly can. There are wonderful resources out there on the internet that you can tap for the purpose. As I also said above, it's amazing how far Wikipedia alone will usually get you.

I personally believe that this rule - getting things right - applies not only to the pivotal facts that make up the actual case and its solution, but to all facts in a story. Most factual errors and inaccuracies in a story _are_ due to lack of research. And lack of research is lack of effort, and lack of effort is lack of respect, both for your own story and for your readers. In my opinion. I'm aware that people's sensitivities in this department vary greatly, from utter perfectionism to being willing to gloss over even glaring mistakes if the rest of the story is still engaging and interesting in other ways. But honestly, if you're going to spend hours, days and weeks of your life writing that story of yours, wouldn't it be a crying shame if it didn't end up being the very best you can do? And if you can't bring yourself to bother to make it that, why should anyone bother to read it?

Don't make this _too_ hard for yourself, though. If you find it difficult to attain the necessary level of confidence to write about a certain subject as if you're truly at home in it, then sometimes it's better to simply avoid it altogether.

For example, if you don't know the first thing about medicine, and don't have a beta reader or another friend who can provide the necessary details, it's probably not a good idea to make your story rely heavily on the detailed depiction of injury/illness, their treatment, hospital procedures and such – no matter how much you like the scenario. There are simply too many readers out there who will know better.

Similarly, if you have little or no knowledge of the criminal law system, police procedure and forensic science, and you can't find the information you need on websites like [this meta on how to write believable murder scenes](http://www.livewritethrive.com/2015/03/02/10-tips-on-how-to-write-believable-crime-and-murder-scenes/), it's not a good idea to make your story hinge on a particular legal or procedural point. People will call you on it if you're wrong.

Rule of thumb: Be vague rather than wrong. If you can't find the exact piece of information you're looking for, don't be too specific about what it might have been. Example: Need an undetectable deadly poison or a fast-acting anaesthetic, but can't find a real one that ticks all the boxes you need? Be vague, or make it up, but don't ascribe non-existent qualities to existing substances.

**Rule No**. **3: Don't cheat your readers.**

A crime story is always a mix of truths, lies and omissions. The characters are trying to hide the truth from each other, and you as the author are trying to hide the truth from your readers, until you're ready to dazzle them with it at last.

But that makes it all the more important that there should be _some_ things your readers can absolutely rely on at all times. This means that _in your capacity as author_ , you can't lie to them. This applies to all facts, big or small, pivotal or circumstantial. If you say that something is A, it can't turn out to be B. If you say it is not A, it can't turn out to be A anyway.

Examples: If you say the door into the room where the victim was found was locked, then it was locked, and you can't make the solution to your mystery hinge on the fact that it was actually not. If you say that the investigator went home and slept tight for the rest of the night, then they did just that, and you can't reveal later that they sneaked out again to do some further investigating without anyone else noticing.

Likewise, you can't lie by omission. Your descriptions, no matter whether of a person, a place, or a sequence of events, must be complete. All elements that are relevant to the solution of your mystery must appear in it.  
  
Example: If you describe the investigators examining a room in the victim's house, and you write only that they closely studied the objects on the mantelpiece and on the window sill, but you say nothing at all about them being interested in the desk, too (or don't even mention that there _is_ a desk), then you can't reveal later that they found an all-important document in one of the desk drawers.

It's a very different matter, however, if you relate the same situation _through the eyes of a character_ (rather than as an omniscient author), reporting not objective facts but only the character's perceptions of them. That will give you the necessary room to turn. If something only _appears_ to be A to your POV character, they could still be wrong, and it could still be B after all!

To go back to the above examples:

It's perfectly permissible to write that when the investigator tried the door handle, it wouldn't give – and still reveal later that the door was not locked but only blocked by furniture on the other side. Because then, you don't present the door being locked as an absolute truth. You only describe the POV character's perception and (mistaken) conclusion.

Likewise, you can perfectly well describe Investigator A (the POV character) dropping off Investigator B outside their home after a long day's work, seeing them enter the house and closing the door behind them - and still reveal later that Investigator B sneaked out again as soon as their colleague had left.

And if, in the third example, Investigator A (the POV character) is in the victim's room but happens to be called away just when they're done examining the mantelpiece and the window sill, and they only enter the room again a couple of minutes later, then of course Investigator B can have found an important document in the desk in the meantime and kept that secret until later. Just don't forget to mention that there _is_ a desk there.

So when you're speaking as the author, you must tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. But you're totally free to make your _POV c_ _haracters_ miss and misinterpret things. To disregard the former rule is cheating; the latter is part of the game. That's an extremely important distinction.

Rule of thumb: Your readers should always be on a par with the POV character, i. e. the readers should know as much or as little as the POV character does at any given point. That means you have to relate all the POV character's perceptions, accurately and fully, right away, even if the perceptions themselves later turn out to be inaccurate or incomplete.

And keep your readers and your POV character on a par for as long as you possibly can. Sometimes, towards the end of the story, you may find yourself wanting to make a secret even of your POV character's own thoughts and knowledge, in order to preserve the suspense for a little longer. But please do that only as a last resort. There's always something very clumsy about it when characters literally start whispering into each other's ears to stop the reader from hearing the murderer's name too soon. I'm aware that even the greatest creators of original crime stories are sometimes guilty of this. They will often make Investigator A say to Investigator B, "And this is what really happened…", only for the scene to fade to black. But I personally feel that's maddening rather than intriguing. If you must do it, do it only once and as close to the real denouement as you can. Definitely don't do it early on in the story, and don't do it regularly.

The "Don't cheat your readers" rule applies to all facts, but it is of paramount importance when it comes to the pivotal ones, the ones that the solution of your mystery rests on. Which leads us to -

**Rule No. 4: Place your clues properly. **

A cardinal rule for any good crime story is that at the end, your readers should not only be able to understand the solution and every step that led to it, but they should also feel that they had an equal chance to solve the mystery themselves. So, laying out the solution of the mystery before your readers so it all comes together and makes sense, with every step and every deduction about the Whodunnit, Howdunnit und Whydunnit logically explained, is a must - but it's not enough. It's equally important to enable your readers, over the course of the story, to _almost_ come to the correct conclusion themselves.

The effect you're going for in your denouement is your readers slapping their foreheads exclaiming "Why didn't I see that!". What you definitely _don't_ want is your readers scratching their heads going "Now where did _that_ come from?". I can't stress this enough. Your readers' overall enjoyment of your casefic (or not) absolutely depends on which of those two reactions the story has given them. If your solution (or an important element of it) comes out of nowhere, your readers will - justly - feel cheated and turn away from your story in disappointment, no matter how clever the solution was in itself.

I mean it when I say this can make or break a story. It's always a terrible shame when a writer _has_ come up with a highly original and very clever plot, only to ruin it by presenting the solution like a rabbit out of a hat, with not even a theoretical chance for the readers to come to the same conclusion themselves. In the literary tradition, this phenomenon is called a [Deus ex machina](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_ex_machina), and it should be anathema to any self-respecting crime writer.

Here's how to avoid it:

Your readers must be, at the time when they get to the big denouement, in possession of all the facts that form the solution of the case, or at least of all the facts from which the solution may be inferred. So you have to mention these facts beforehand, or at least strongly imply them. This is technically known as "placing a clue". Whatever isn't mentioned or at least implied in your story technically doesn't exist in it, and what doesn't exist can't be part of the solution.

Seriously, there are only two things that are really hard to do well in casefic - one is to make the story make sense, and the other is this. But both are indispensable for success.

Think of placing your clues as of planting seeds. You should do no more than that. Let them grow into a flower gradually over the course of the story. Don't bring your little seedling to full bloom before the grand finale. But the seeds need to be there from the beginning.

Clues can take many shapes and forms, depending on what your mystery is, and on how it gets solved.

Clues can be actual physical objects, or the physical layout of a location.

If a specific object found at the crime scene turns out to be a vital clue, then the readers must have "seen" it there with their own eyes, even though they may not attach any importance to it at first. Example: If the ugly porcelain figurine of a Dalmatian dog on the victim's desk is a vital clue, then you must inform the readers that it was there as soon as your POV character themselves perceived it (or, if they never set foot in the place themselves, as soon as they're told about it by another character). You can't _not_ mention the thing, and then claim later at the denouement that it was always there.

Or if there's a window overlooking a certain location, and you're planning to reveal at the denouement that a witness observed and overheard something important from it, then your readers must have "seen" that window _before_ the denouement.

Clues can also be non-physical items, such as pieces of information, and even whole characters.

Every character who turns out to play a pivotal part in the story, especially the villain, must have been introduced to it in some way or another before the denouement. They needn't necessarily come on stage in person, they can just be mentioned by someone else. They also needn't be introduced in every detail - their name, their exact relationship with the other characters and their physical appearance can (and sometimes should) remain secret until the end. But there needs to be some prior indication that they - or at least someone like them - exist at all.

Likewise, every theme that turns out to be important in the story, especially if it provides the motive for the crime, must have been introduced to it in some way or another before the denouement (though not necessarily in the context of the actual crime). If your crime is the result of a conflict among drug dealers, introduce the drugs theme _before_ the denouement. If your crime has a political background, mention the relevant political issue _before_ the denouement. If you're writing about a crime of passion, hint at the possibility of the personal conflict behind it _before_ the denouement. You get the point.

The same rule also applies to any important item of a character's backstory. If it comes into the solution, then you need to set it up _before_ the denouement, too. This is especially important if this piece of information is your own invention, rather than a confirmed canonical fact that everybody knows anyway. But even when canonical backstory comes into play, it's usually a good idea to casually mention this aspect of the character's past at an earlier point in the story, to prevent it coming out of the blue later on. For example, if you're going to solve the mystery by pulling an old enemy from the investigator's past out of your hat, there should be a previous mention of this part of their past and the problems or conflicts they may have faced back then in the story _before_ it becomes pivotal.

Likewise, if your story hinges on a certain aspect of a character's personality, or on any specific skills or abilities of theirs that aren't general canon knowledge, you need to establish those, too. For example, if one of your OCs has the ability to lip-read and this allows them to "eavesdrop" on an important conversation that they could not have overheard otherwise, you have to tell your readers about that ability, or at least strongly imply it (for example by mentioning or showing that the character in question is deaf/hard of hearing), _before_ you use it as a plot device in the denouement.

But of course you don't want to draw undue attention to the important facts too early on. Remember, you want your readers to feel like they _could have_ solved the puzzle themselves, but you don't want them to actually do it! That means you have to walk a fine line between being too obvious and being too obscure. This is tricky, but there are rules for this, too.

Generally, there are five ways how to plant your clues without being too obvious.

  
**Variant No. 1** is placing the clue and the revelation of the clue's actual importance as far apart in the timeline of the story as possible. The distance in time will increase the chance of your readers simply having forgotten all about the clue by the time the investigators realise its significance.

 **Variant No. 2** is hiding a relevant fact in a forest of irrelevant ones (also known as Red Herrings), by making the irrelevant ones appear more important than they truly are.

 **Variant No. 3** is hiding a relevant fact in a context that has as little as possible to do with the actual crime.

 **Variant No. 4** is hiding a relevant fact by cloaking it in silence.

 **Variant No. 5** , often the most elegant, is to suggest an incorrect interpretation of a relevant fact.

To go back to the above example of the ugly porcelaine figurine of the Dalmatian dog on the victim's desk: Let's assume that there's a secret document or digital data carrier hidden inside it, which is vital for the solution of the mystery. That means you need to let your readers "see" that dog as soon as your POV character perceives it (or is told of its existence), but of course you want to obscure its importance for the time being. This is how you can do it:

**Variant No. 1 - Exploit distance in time.**

Mention the dog figure only once and in passing very early on in the story, like when the investigators look over the crime scene for the first time. Then never mention it again until the investigator's epiphany.

**Variant No. 2 - Hide the clue in a forest of red herrings.**

On the victim's desk, there's the dog, but there are also other unexpected and even stranger and more intriguing objects, for example an antique bronze dagger of uncertain provenance, a framed photograph of an unknown attractive young woman, and a data CD broken in half, so the investigators' focus is on those other objects at first. But they ultimately all turn out to be of no or only minor importance.

 **Variant No. 3 - Hide the clue in an unrelated context.**  
Mention someone hiding a document or digital data carrier inside some other object at some earlier point in the story, but in a context that has nothing at all to do with the crime. The moment our heroes finally remember that parallel case, they realise the dog's function, too.

 **Variant No. 4 - Cloak the clue in silence.**  
Just… don't talk about it. Even if the discovery of the clue generated questions at the time that a reader would think needed following up on, just make your investigators fail to discuss or follow up on them for the time being. Trust me, even a very acute reader would rather doubt their own acuity than assume that the investigators (and hence the author) could have overlooked something so glaringly obvious. This is often especially effective in conjunction with Variant No. 1.

 **Variant No. 5 - Suggest an incorrect interpretation of the clue.**  
It may look strange at first that the dog should be there at all (the victim had no dog, nor did they like them), but soon a plausible (but ultimately incorrect or at least incomplete) explanation for its presence suggests itself (it's an heirloom, it's a souvenir...). So our heroes mistakenly dismiss it as having no deeper meaning than that, until their final epiphany.

Please note that these variants aren't mutually exclusive. On the contrary, you may find yourself applying several or even all five variants to one and the same clue!

At masterclass level, you can also plant your clues by combining two whole, seemingly unrelated cases. Case 1 is your main case, which takes up most of the space in your story, and gets all the readers' attention. Case 2 appears to be a mere sub-plot at first. It is depicted (or even just mentioned) only in passing and in much less detail. This second case could be something the investigators are working on concurrently but without much enthusiasm, or something they worked on earlier but never solved, or something they've put off until later because it seemed less urgent. But in fact, the two cases turn out to be related, and the second case eventually provides the solution to the first. You'll have my utmost respect if you manage to pull this technique off, because it never, _never_ fails to impress – but it IS masterclass level, so don't beat yourself up if it seems too complex.

So much for the theory. Ultimately, the question whether you've been too obvious or too obscure while placing your clues, and whether there are too few or too many, can only be answered with regards to the actual story.

Which leads us straight into

**Rule No. 5: Do a trial run. **

Many fanfic writers work with a beta reader anyway, and if you do, then you've got this point already covered. Even if your beta reader usually only checks your stories for spelling, grammar and typos - if you're doing a casefic, ask them for their opinion on the content as well.

If you generally prefer not to work with a beta reader, or if you simply haven't managed to find one yet, still try and get a (fandom) friend to test-read the story and just put in their reactions on your plot twists and your revelations, every "oh!" and "ah!" and "OMG!", and of course also every "WTF?" and every "well that was bloody obvious". Ask them how well (or not) your clues worked. If they're willing to go into detail, ask them specific questions like "At what point exactly did you realise that the young lady the victim was seen with before he died wasn't his mistress, but his secret illegitimate daughter?"

You'll sometimes be surprised at their answers. Because both the obviousness (or not) of your clues and your red herrings, and the effect that your plot twists and cliffhangers and revelations will have on the readers, are really, really hard to predict if you know the solution anyway. So if you don't want to accidentally ruin your best surprises by timing them badly and your clever conclusions by either over- or under-explaining them, I'd absolutely urge you to get a second opinion before exposing the story to a larger audience.

**Rule No. 6: Never post a casefic as a WIP.**

Really not. Please. Even if you work with a very detailed plot outline, never, _never_ post even the first chapter of your story before you've finalised the last one (and all others in between, too, if you share my habit of writing out of sequence). Just don't do it. You'll be in so much trouble, and all of it completely unnecessary.

Because you _will_ want to go back and change things. But you won't know which things, and how exactly, until you've written the whole story, solution and all. Even the cleverest among us will occasionally write themselves into corners. This is especially true when it comes to the proper placement of clues, as discussed in Rule No. 3. Trust me, you really need to have the whole story down on paper/screen, right in front of your eyes, before you (and your beta-reader) can judge correctly whether the story makes sense and whether the clues come in the right number, at the right time, in the right order, and in an adequately obscured form.

Most chaptered casefics (and this rule obviously applies only to them, not to one-shots) simply are too complex to be put down, flawless and perfect, in one fell swoop. Don't put yourself under that pressure, it's a battle you're not going to win. On the contrary - premature posting will inevitably result in dissatisfaction on all sides. You'll be unhappy with the story because in retrospect, of course it could have been better if you'd polished it properly. And your readers will either be frustrated if the story is not as good as it could have been, or you'll overtax their patience by asking them to go back and re-read an earlier chapter that you had to do heavy retroactive editing on. Or, at the very worst, you may not find your way out of one of those damned corners at all, and your story will end up in the graveyard of abandoned WIPs, yet another monument to the truth of the saying that haste makes waste. You really don't want any of that to happen.

So please don't sacrifice the quality of your story to the short-lived gratification of instant feedback. Your story deserves better than that.

And now I want to read it. So make sure you drop me a line when you post yours! :)

* * *

Further reading: 

There's a ton of material out there on the internet about "How to write crime fiction". Two contemporary metas I've found useful are on [thecreativepen.com](http://www.thecreativepenn.com/2014/01/17/writing-crime/) and on [nownovel.com](http://www.nownovel.com/blog/writing-crime-fiction/). Or if you like, read up on what the classics have to say on the matter - at least ninety-five percent of it is still true:

  * [G. K. Chesterton](http://www.chesterton.org/how-to-write-detective/)
  * [Ronald Knox](https://www.writingclasses.com/toolbox/tips-masters/ronald-knox-10-commandments-of-detective-fiction)
  * [Raymond Chandler ](http://www.openculture.com/2014/02/raymond-chandlers-ten-commandments-for-writing-a-detective-novel.html)



And it's also helpful to simply read a lot of crime fiction, and casefic by fellow fanfic writers. That way, you'll soon note what works and what doesn't. That's how I figured out everything I've said here, too.

If you've found this little tutorial helpful, please let me know. If you have questions, or suggestions for improvements and additions, ditto! I'd love to hear what you think.


End file.
